|
Post by MnkdWASmyRtrmntPlan on Jan 5, 2018 21:07:14 GMT -5
I would expect big players to be a little leery after Sanofi failed to sell it. Sure, we know things are different now, but that may not be as obvious to others not so invested. Maybe I just read your comment differently than you intended it, but technically, Sanofi didn't fail to sell it; they just stopped selling it. They were selling it fine until they stopped trying. Sanofi's new replacement CEO didn't want to sell it. All the "big players" as you call them know that. In fact, they know that and think about Afrezza even more than we do. And, you are correct that things are different now. We're in the age of CGM's now, and Afrezza is the only shining star in that arena.
|
|
|
Post by yash on Jan 5, 2018 21:27:53 GMT -5
Founded in 1991, Mannkind is almost 27 years in the making. 2 years ago, our U.S. sales and marketing partnership with one of the Big 3 almost bankrupted us, causing us to drop from $11 to 50 cents. I think we can take a couple extra quarters or even years doing it ourselves to avoid that kind of criminal usury again. Also, the stat study results will help us sell the insurance companies on us. Until which year Afrezza patent is valid before other companies come up with Generic drug replacing Afrezza?
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jan 5, 2018 21:43:08 GMT -5
Frankly, I think Castagna has been working on a way around the lack of coverage issue with a novel subscription-based business plan he has mentioned working more than once. Such a plan would involve partners outside the usual pharmaceutical companies. I suspect that he has one big surprise in store for MNKD shareholders.
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Jan 5, 2018 22:05:59 GMT -5
Finding a Partner or Partners is not the problem. Finding the Partner or Partners who see more value in Afrezza by selling it to people with Diabetes than they see in destroying it, or shelving it is part of the challenge. Then the other part is getting them to pay a price that justifies the battles this Company has had to overcome to get to this point. Negotiating is a two way street, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out Nobody is going to get Afrezza for peanuts.
As scripts begin to climb, so will the offers,
Good Luck to everybody . 😎
|
|
|
Post by mango on Jan 5, 2018 22:54:04 GMT -5
MannKind’s potential transcends the modern idea of what makes a company great and valuable—their future will bloom with immense, heroic grandness.
MannKind’s science unveils the prodigious vision of Alfred Mann.
MannKind’s values are forged with hope and inspiration.
MannKind is a light of the future for the health of the world.
A pharmaceutical company that has a genuine love for helping others is rare and rather invaluable.
MannKind cares.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jan 5, 2018 23:52:15 GMT -5
Frankly, I think Castagna has been working on a way around the lack of coverage issue with a novel subscription-based business plan he has mentioned working more than once. Such a plan would involve partners outside the usual pharmaceutical companies. I suspect that he has one big surprise in store for MNKD shareholders. I like the way you think. Let me throw this out at you. Maybe Mike is looking for the ultimate homerun. Think about this tie-up. CVS is buying Aetna, strange deal? The healthcare pharmacy/PBM buying an Insurance company. Now Think about all the Quick care centers within pharmacies like CVS,Walgreens, Rite Aid stores. Bring cheaper insulin to the masses, having diabetes centers like VDEX concept within the Pharmacy store. Far-fetched? Perhaps today, but in the future when everybody is truly looking at how to make insulin more affordable to the public. A company like MannKind Could revolutionize diabetes treatment. Making it accessible for reasonable pricing to folks who can’t afford the coverage. (Don’t shoot the dreamer. It’s Friday evening and I have not been drinking.)
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jan 5, 2018 23:58:55 GMT -5
Mannkind stepped into quicksand with the Sanofi deal who suddenly fired their CEO. Mike C will make the right deal this time around from a position of strength with the STAT study results, rising scripts and growth versus entering into other bad partnerships the past two years with obstacles such as titration and insurance that have now improved. I expect Mike to announce new domestic and global partnerships this year but this time with Mannkind retaining primary control. Correct they will find an international partner, who Will buy a 15% to 20% interest in the company. The cash from this buy in will insure that the company has the capital to make Afrezza successful in the US market. MannKind needed the new shares to sell the international partner.
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jan 6, 2018 6:48:10 GMT -5
Finding a Partner or Partners is not the problem. Finding the Partner or Partners who see more value in Afrezza by selling it to people with Diabetes than they see in destroying it, or shelving it is part of the challenge. Then the other part is getting them to pay a price that justifies the battles this Company has had to overcome to get to this point. Negotiating is a two way street, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out Nobody is going to get Afrezza for peanuts. As scripts begin to climb, so will the offers, Good Luck to everybody . 😎 Well said - I also think the market place is rapidly changing including the way diabetes is treated. 2017 saw a huge leap in moving toward going beyondA1c with the rapid adoption of CGM and monitoring. Onduo is soon to announce their product while others like One Drop have been making great progress for a startup. The big question in my mind is a Tech company like an Amazon, Google or Apple the way to go or is a BP the way to go? If there is a VDex type model to provide the bridge between the cloud service and PWD, whats the value of a BP? I don't see much except money and the Techs have a lot more and they have the technology.
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Jan 6, 2018 7:22:22 GMT -5
Stat study results will be presented at ada in june? so i guess no partner until late summer Partnerships could be announced at any time. Stat study results will be presented "publicly" in June. Mannkind is most likely prohibited from discussing it "publicly" until then. "Privately" is a different story. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions.
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jan 6, 2018 7:48:02 GMT -5
Stat study results will be presented at ada in june? so i guess no partner until late summer Partnerships could be announced at any time. Stat study results will be presented "publicly" in June. Mannkind is most likely prohibited from discussing it "publicly" until then. "Privately" is a different story. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Agree completely on that! But why would be we be prohibited from announcing before the ADA? I understand it’s because of them being published in journals but what if it’s to our benefit to announce before?
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Jan 6, 2018 8:01:35 GMT -5
Partnerships could be announced at any time. Stat study results will be presented "publicly" in June. Mannkind is most likely prohibited from discussing it "publicly" until then. "Privately" is a different story. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Agree completely on that! But why would be we be prohibited from announcing before the ADA? I understand it’s because of them being published in journals but what if it’s to our benefit to announce before? I don't know for sure. Someone suggested that the University of Colorado, who created the study and provided the funding, has the legal exclusivity to present its findings at the ADA. I can see why they would want to protect that right. It would be great if this isn't true and the results could be announced at any time.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jan 6, 2018 8:10:20 GMT -5
Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Agree completely on that! But why would be we be prohibited from announcing before the ADA? I understand it’s because of them being published in journals but what if it’s to our benefit to announce before? I don't know for sure. Someone suggested that the University of Colorado, who created the study and provided the funding, has the legal exclusivity to present its findings at the ADA. I can see why they would want to protect that right. It would be great if this isn't true and the results could be announced at any time. That's the problem, it's not our trial so we don't own the results. University of Colorado spent the money to perform the trail so the results are theirs.
|
|
|
Post by boca1girl on Jan 6, 2018 8:12:39 GMT -5
Partnerships could be announced at any time. Stat study results will be presented "publicly" in June. Mannkind is most likely prohibited from discussing it "publicly" until then. "Privately" is a different story. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Mike C has stated he wants partnerships. He likely already knows the results and is using them in discussions. Agree completely on that! But why would be we be prohibited from announcing before the ADA? I understand it’s because of them being published in journals but what if it’s to our benefit to announce before? MNKD probably had to sign a confidential disclosure agreement before receiving any results from the study. MNKD did not fund the study and does not have the legal right to disclose the results.
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jan 6, 2018 8:31:42 GMT -5
I don't know for sure. Someone suggested that the University of Colorado, who created the study and provided the funding, has the legal exclusivity to present its findings at the ADA. I can see why they would want to protect that right. It would be great if this isn't true and the results could be announced at any time. That's the problem, it's not our trial so we don't own the results. University of Colorado spent the money to perform the trail so the results are theirs. So what do they get out of it? Do we pay them for the results?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2018 8:58:39 GMT -5
"Someone suggested that the University of Colorado, who created the study and provided the funding, has the legal exclusivity to present its findings at the ADA."
The ultimate funding was provided by taxpayers. While the university can take a reasonable amount of time to publish the data, it cannot withhold it indefinitely.
|
|